Canada upholds a woman's right to choose.

CHOOSE TO MURDER HER BABY THAT IS DUN-DUN-DUN.

The Wetaskiwin, Alta., woman convicted of infanticide for killing her newborn son, was given a three-year suspended sentence Friday by an Edmonton Court of Queen's Bench judge.

Katrina Effert was 19 on April 13, 2005, when she secretly gave birth in her parents' home, strangled the baby boy with her underwear and threw the body over a fence into a neighbour's yard.

She silently wept as Justice Joanne Veit outlined the reasons for the suspended sentence. Effert will have to abide by conditions for the next three years but she won't spend time behind bars for strangling her newborn son.

Next week, the court will hear arguments on a remaining issue from Effert's long legal battle: the 16 days of jail time she still must serve for throwing her baby's body over the fence.

Her lawyer, Peter Royal, asked the court to do away with the penalty or allow her to serve the time on weekends. It was "unjust" and "almost mean to incarcerate her" at this point, he argued.

im pro choice but thats really awful 😬

This sounds very familiar.

Doubly so.

I wonder it ever occurred to her to get an abortion? I mean, it's got to be easier to do in Canada then in the US.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
CHOOSE TO MURDER HER BABY THAT IS DUN-DUN-DUN.

Good work, feminists.

This post is misleading. She was found guilty of infanticide and the improper disposal of a body and was sentenced accordingly. She is only spending so little time in prison because of the amount of time she spent in remand centres, prisons, and psychiatric hospitals while her case was tried four times in six years.

Originally posted by Lucius
I wonder it ever occurred to her to get an abortion? I mean, it's got to be easier to do in Canada then in the US.

Her irrational decision to commit infanticide instead of seeking an abortion, which is legal at all stages of pregnancy in Canada, is one of the reasons the Crown found she suffered from diminished moral blameworthiness.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Her irrational decision to commit infanticide instead of seeking an abortion, which is legal at all stages of pregnancy in Canada, is one of the reasons the Crown found she suffered from diminished moral blameworthiness.

I'm not saying I disagree with the decision. Locking her up certainty isn't going to accomplish anything. I suppose I'm more curious to the circumstances that led up to the event.

Frankly I still find the ruling (or laws?) ridiculous. Infanticide should come with a sentence for life IMO.

Infanticide is murder.

The woman murdered her child. No matter which way you look at it, it is an act of murder.

Originally posted by AthenasTrgrFngr
im pro choice but thats really awful 😬

That is what proabortion people do. I am surprise that you had changed that after hearing this story, 🙂

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
That is what proabortion people do. I am surprise that you had changed that after hearing this story, 🙂

go canada 😄

Over those six years she's been tried, how much time did see spend in a prison? That's the only time she should be allowed to deduct from her sentence for murdering, imo.

Also, three years for murder seems low to me. People with marijuana convictions have received more time.

Well that's the point, it wasn't murder under Canadian law.

Originally posted by Robtard
Over those six years she's been tried, how much time did see spend in a prison? That's the only time she should be allowed to deduct from her sentence for murdering, imo.

Also, three years for murder seems low to me.

What do you think more time would do in this case, aside for appease some need to punish the girl?

Its pretty clearly a psychological issue at play here

Originally posted by Robtard
People with marijuana convictions have received more time.

not in Canada, unless you are talking major grow ops. A 3 year sentence for drugs here is pretty major, and normally would come as a result of connections to other criminal enterprise

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Well that's the point, it wasn't murder under Canadian law.

Wasn't aware infanticide wasn't a form of murder.

You are now!

The murder charge she was facing has a minimum 10 year sentence.

But Canadian law has a specific provision for infanticide which it specifies is different from murder due to the psychological state of the mother. In this case, two murder convictions were reduced to infanticide on appeal. The Canadian infanticide law rarely jails the mother.

In Canada, infanticide is not murder.

Originally posted by inimalist
What do you think more time would do in this case, aside for appease some need to punish the girl?

Its pretty clearly a psychological issue at play here

not in Canada, unless you are talking major grow ops. A 3 year sentence for drugs here is pretty major, and normally would come as a result of connections to other criminal enterprise

Appease some need to punish the girl. If we take the "oh well, what's done is done" attitude then we should probably not have many people behind bars, at least no first time offenders serving jail time, be it murder, rape or theft.

IMO, "crazy" isn't an excuse to dismiss punishment. Call me crazy.

Fair enough, I was looking at it from a US standpoint.

Originally posted by Robtard
Appease some need to punish the girl. If we take the "oh well, what's done is done" attitude then we should probably not have many people behind bars, at least no first time offenders serving jail time, be it murder, rape or theft.

IMO, "crazy" isn't an excuse to dismiss punishment. Call me crazy.

Murderers, rapists, and thieves are active dangers to society.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
You are now!

The murder charge she was facing has a minimum 10 year sentence.

But Canadian law has a specific provision for infanticide which it specifies is different from murder due to the psychological state of the mother. In this case, two murder convictions were reduced to infanticide on appeal. The Canadian infanticide law rarely jails the mother.

In Canada, infanticide is not murder.

What a stupid law.

That, I believe, is the idea behind this thread.